Date of Decision: March 17, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: 3D Artist and Animator
Field: Animation and 3D Art
Nationality: Filipino
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge: The petitioner served as a judge for the thesis evaluation at his alma mater, I I College, demonstrating recognition of his expertise.
High Salary or Remuneration: Evidence showed that the petitioner commanded a high salary relative to others in his geographic region, supported by reliable sources and year-end earnings.
Criteria Not Met:
Awards and Prizes: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that his awards, such as the Certificate of Recognition and the Division-level Award from I I Corporation, were nationally or internationally recognized.
Membership in Associations: The petitioner claimed membership in associations like the Korea-Philippines Information Technology Training Center and 3D Mentors Group, but did not establish that these memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: The petitioner failed to provide published material primarily about him and his work in the field in professional or major trade publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: Letters and evidence submitted did not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner’s contributions had major significance in the field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner’s thesis project did not qualify as a scholarly article published in professional or major trade publications.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: The petitioner’s work, such as a music video on YouTube, did not meet the criterion of being displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Leading or Critical Role: Evidence did not establish that the petitioner’s roles at various organizations were leading or critical.
Commercial Successes: The petitioner did not provide evidence of commercial success in the performing arts through box office receipts or sales of recorded media.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner provided certificates and awards from I I Studio and I I Corporation but did not prove these were nationally or internationally recognized.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The material submitted did not focus primarily on the petitioner and his work. An article about a contest he won was not sufficient to meet this criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Letters from employers and colleagues praised the petitioner’s skills but lacked specifics on how his contributions were of major significance in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner’s role as a judge for a thesis evaluation at his former university was recognized as meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that memberships were based on outstanding achievements judged by experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner’s thesis project did not meet the requirements for scholarly articles published in major media.
Leading or Critical Role:
Letters from employers did not provide detailed information to establish the petitioner’s roles as leading or critical.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Uploading work to YouTube or displaying designs at trade shows did not qualify as artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner provided probative evidence of his high salary relative to others in his region, which met this criterion.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of commercial success through sales or box office receipts.
Supporting Documentation
Certificates and Awards: Recognitions from I I Studio and I I Corporation.
Letters from Employers: Testimonials from various employers praising his skills and contributions.
Salary Evidence: Documentation of year-end earnings and comparisons to regional salary data.
Educational Contributions: Role as a judge for thesis evaluations and volunteer work.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Denied
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirements for three of the ten criteria. Additionally, the overall evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. The petition was therefore denied on appeal.
Next Steps
Recommendations: The petitioner may consider providing more robust and specific evidence for each criterion and seek legal advice to better align future submissions with USCIS requirements.
By thoroughly addressing each criterion and ensuring all evidence clearly demonstrates the required level of recognition and achievement, future petitions may have a better chance of approval.
